On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 04:09:18PM -0400, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> I was hoping someone else would chime in (I hate dominating discussions
> on MLs, so someone, please cut me off)
No worries, it's always good to have (constructive) feedback :-)
> > The arguments in favor of keeping it seem reasonable in the abstract
> > but, frankly, all a tad too "theoretical". As a matter of fact we do not
> > use the restricted logo that much (if at all) in official documents: as
> > DPL I've signed quite a few of them (letters, certificates, some
> > contracts, etc.) and I've never used the restricted logo. I also don't
>
> I mean, sure. This is something we can change, if we decide to do so.
> It's also true this is not currently an active concern.
Oh, I fully agree with that. My, let's say, "cultural" point is that I
don't see us doing that, ever. Simply because using restricted content
is something we viscerally don't like. So, even if rationally we see
reasons to use the restricted logo somewhere, I don't see it us doing
and sticking to it. But again, if we still consider something
potentially useful to do, let's keep the possibility --- we'll see a few
years from now what happens...
> > How about the attached patch?
>
> Looks great to me. Calling it restricted is technically correct, and
> well, that's the the best kind of correct.
Given the patch seems quite consensual, and appreciated from both
"camps" in this discussion, I've just applied it. It will go live at the
next website rebuild. Wording improvements are appreciated, as usual.
As I've forgotten to do so in the initial patch proposal, I should give
credit to Ian Jackson for proposing the entirely appropriate "restricted
logo" name, during an IRC conversation: thanks Ian!
Thanks everybody for this thread,
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . zack@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o
Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o
Debian Project Leader . . . . . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o .
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »